Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gay judge's same-sex marriage ruling upheld
Associated Press ^ | June 14, 2011 | LISA LEFF

Posted on 06/14/2011 1:32:35 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- A federal judge has upheld a gay judge's ruling to strike down California's same-sex marriage ban.

Chief U.S. District Judge James Ware said Tuesday that former Chief Judge Vaughn Walker did not have to divulge whether he wanted to marry his own gay partner before he declared last year that voter-approved Proposition 8 was unconstitutional.

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gaystapo; homosexualagenda; prop8; vaughnwalker
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

1 posted on 06/14/2011 1:32:39 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Anyone surpised!?


2 posted on 06/14/2011 1:33:57 PM PDT by US Navy Vet (Go Packers! Go Rockies! Go Boston Bruins! See, I'm "Diverse"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Never mind what the people want and legally voted for.


3 posted on 06/14/2011 1:37:13 PM PDT by texaschick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

this is a textbook definition of conflict of interest.


4 posted on 06/14/2011 1:40:15 PM PDT by newnhdad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110614/lf_afp/francesocietygaymarriageparliament

And the French just outlawed.


5 posted on 06/14/2011 1:40:27 PM PDT by edcoil (What? Me worry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edcoil

“And the French just outlawed.”

The end is near when the French start showing more common sense than us.


6 posted on 06/14/2011 1:43:31 PM PDT by I cannot think of a name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

So what next? The California voters passed a constitutional amendment to block gay marriage and a federal judge can just invalidate it? Is the homo judge’s ruling being appealed on other grounds? I hope this isn’t the end of the line.


7 posted on 06/14/2011 1:46:10 PM PDT by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY; AFA-Michigan; Abathar; Albion Wilde; AliVeritas; Antoninus; BabaOreally; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.

Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.

Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.

Common sense, normalcy and the will of the people lose again!

8 posted on 06/14/2011 1:46:31 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

No suprise here as the Federal judiciary has long shown a favoritism towards the criminal element in our society.


9 posted on 06/14/2011 1:46:37 PM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

That’s exactly it. The people spoke and the activist judiciary over-rides them.


10 posted on 06/14/2011 1:47:55 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: newnhdad
this is a textbook definition of conflict of interest.

You are 100% correct. As a 'Judge', he had to be completely neutral in the decision; which was impossible, as he had a vested personal interest in his decision.

11 posted on 06/14/2011 1:52:49 PM PDT by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: newnhdad
this is a textbook definition of conflict of interest.

You are 100% correct. As a 'Judge', he had to be completely neutral in the decision; which was impossible, as he had a vested personal interest in his decision.

12 posted on 06/14/2011 1:52:58 PM PDT by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY
Justice is blind, unless there's a wiener involved.
13 posted on 06/14/2011 1:55:49 PM PDT by JPG (Hey, LSM, how are those emails workin' out for ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

The game is rigged my friends.


14 posted on 06/14/2011 1:55:56 PM PDT by Hacklehead (Liberalism is the art of taking what works, breaking it, and then blaming conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet; texaschick

A federal judge on Tuesday upheld a gay judge’s ruling to strike down California’s same-sex marriage ban.


15 posted on 06/14/2011 1:56:52 PM PDT by Red Badger (Nothing is a 'right' if someone has to give it to you................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Don’t people read articles before commenting any more?.................


16 posted on 06/14/2011 1:57:44 PM PDT by Red Badger (Nothing is a 'right' if someone has to give it to you................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
How does a federal judge have any jurisdiction over a California state constitution issue? It's a violation of the 10th Amendment right of states to make their own decisions.
17 posted on 06/14/2011 2:15:00 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY; All
The actual appeal case remains ongoing. This ruling simply addressed the 'conflict' question.

-from the article:

Ware called it the first case in which a judge's same-sex relationship had led to calls for disqualification. He said there probably were similar struggles when race and gender were the issues.

The ruling does not settle the legal fight over Proposition 8. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is considering whether Walker properly concluded that denying gays and lesbians the right to marry violates their rights to due process and equal protection.

In his ruling, Ware cited previous cases dealing with women and minority judges in concluding that his predecessor had acted appropriately.


18 posted on 06/14/2011 2:19:46 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Then, by that logic, no judge would ever have to recuse themselves.


19 posted on 06/14/2011 2:23:23 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

Except that race and gender are NOT the same and sexual behavior. By his reasoning a judge that’s a pedophile would not have to recuse themselves in a pedophile case. Or for any other behavior. This judge just declared that genetic qualities equals behavior.


20 posted on 06/14/2011 2:34:08 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson